3.8 Article

The Effectiveness and Safety of Medical Cannabis for Treating Cancer Related Symptoms in Oncology Patients

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PAIN RESEARCH
卷 3, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpain.2022.861037

关键词

medical use; cannabis; phytocannabinoids; oncology; cancer; prospective

资金

  1. Evelyn Gruss Lipper Charitable Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of medical cannabis to treat cancer-related symptoms is increasing. This study prospectively followed up on the effectiveness and safety of medical cannabis treatment in oncology patients. The results showed that most patients experienced significant improvement in symptoms during medical cannabis treatment, with common but non-serious adverse effects.
The use of medical cannabis (MC) to treat cancer-related symptoms is rising. However, there is a lack of long-term trials to assess the benefits and safety of MC treatment in this population. In this work, we followed up prospectively and longitudinally on the effectiveness and safety of MC treatment. Oncology patients reported on multiple symptoms before and after MC treatment initiation at one-, three-, and 6-month follow-ups. Oncologists reported on the patients' disease characteristics. Intention-to-treat models were used to assess changes in outcomes from baseline. MC treatment was initiated by 324 patients and 212, 158 and 126 reported at follow-ups. Most outcome measures improved significantly during MC treatment for most patients (p < 0.005). Specifically, at 6 months, total cancer symptoms burden declined from baseline by a median of 18%, from 122 (82-157) at baseline to 89 (45-138) at endpoint (-18.98; 95%CI= -26.95 to -11.00; p < 0.001). Reported adverse effects were common but mostly non-serious and remained stable during MC treatment. The results of this study suggest that MC treatment is generally safe for oncology patients and can potentially reduce the burden of associated symptoms with no serious MC-related adverse effects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据